DETAILED ACTION
Status of Application
Acknowledgement is made of amendments filed 04/28/2026. Upon entering the amendments, claims 9 and 21 are canceled and claims 1, 12-20, and 22-23 are amended. The claims 1-8, 10-20, and 22-23 are pending and presented for the examination.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
2. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
3. Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being rejected by Danielson et al (US 10597322 B2).
Regarding claim 12, Danielson et al teaches a glass composition comprising 77.156 mol% SiO2, 3.997 mol% Al2O3, 13.27 mol% Na2O, 0.100 mol% K2O, 4.757 mol% MgO, and 0.196 mol% CaO (see Table 2, composition 3). Each amount falls within the corresponding range of instant claim 12, and the R ratio Al2O3/Na2O of the aforementioned glass is 0.3. Said glass has a CTE of 74.6 x 10-7K-1. Each limitation of claim 12 is thus met by the Danielson et al teachings, and the claim is anticipated by the prior art of record.
Allowable Subject Matter
4. Claims 1-8, 10-11, 13-20, and 22-23 are allowed. The prior art, either alone or in combination, fails to teach or suggest a glass article comprised of a glass meeting each compositional limitation of instant claim 1, and wherein the glass has a thickness of 100 µm or less and a CTE of 65-75 x 10-7K-1. The prior art also does not teach an electronic device comprising a cover comprised of a glass meeting each compositional limitation of instant claim 13, wherein the device further comprises a display panel under said cover and a bonding layer therebetween, wherein the cover is a window with a thickness of 100 µm or less, and wherein the cover has a CTE of 65-75 x 10-7K-1.
Response to Arguments
5. Applicant’s arguments filed 04/28/2026 have been fully considered. The arguments are persuasive regarding amended independent claims 1 and 13 and the claims depending therefrom, and the previously issued grounds of prior art rejection based thereon are withdrawn, as discussed above. The arguments are not persuasive, however, at showing distinctness of amended independent claim 12. The amendments add to said claim the limitation that the glass composition has a CTE of 65-75 x 10-7K-1. The previously cited exemplary embodiment glass taught by Danielson et al has a CTE that falls within this range. As such, while the amendments overcome the rejection over Wang et al by including this limitation, they do not overcome the rejection over Danielson et al, because this rejection did not necessitate a teaching as to the glass article thickness. Thus, amended claim 12 is still anticipated by Danielson et al, and the ground of rejection is still applied to the claim.
Conclusion
6. Claim 12 is rejected. Claims 1-8, 10-11, 13-20, and 22-23 are allowed.
7. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
8. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NOAH S WIESE whose telephone number is (571)270-3596. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday, 7:30am-4:30pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Amber Orlando can be reached on 571-270-3149. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
9. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/NOAH S WIESE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1731
NSW7 July 2026
Prosecution Insights